So I've always been fascinated with what one can do with a tilt lens, especially on the wide end. I have a Rainbowimaging tilt adapter (to Nikon F) and it's been fun, but none of my Nikon lenses are wide enough for landscapes when used on m4/3. In addition, the adapter doesn't rotate, so I don't have much control over where I place the focal plane. However, I've seen adapters that combine tilt, shift and rotation (I don't care about shift really - seems that Photoshop is a better solution for architectural shots). It's a pretty expensive adapter, but I figure coupled with the Samyang 14/2.8, it'll give me a 28/5.6 equivalent lens that can put the focal plane pretty much anywhere, meaning as narrow or wide DoF as one likes.

Question is whether anybody else has tried this. Are there any gotchas I should be aware of? In particular, the adapter is not inexpensive (and likely would be impossible to sell if I find it lacking), so comments from folks with personal experience, or who've used wide-angle tilt lenses before, would be most appreciated!

I would also be interested in impressions of the Samyang on m4/3. As far as I can tell, it is well reviewed, but then again there don't seem to be a lot of good wide-angle primes for full-frame, particularly not inexpensive ones - I'd love a 12mm f/2.8 but it just plain doesn't seem to exist...

P.S. Just for fun, here's one of my older tilt experiments (using a 28/3.5):

I would also be interested in impressions of the Samyang on m4/3. As far as I can tell, it is well reviewed, but then again there don't seem to be a lot of good wide-angle primes for full-frame, particularly not inexpensive ones - I'd love a 12mm f/2.8 but it just plain doesn't seem to exist...

I had a Samyang 14/2.8 back when I ran a 5d mk ii. It's a nice sharp lens, but the build quality, despite feeling heavy and substantial is not great. The focus mechanism had a lot of slop in it and the calibration of the distance scale was miles off. I exchanged mails with a guy in Germany who had stripped one down and he was of the view that it was a cheap mechanical design. However, optically it was better than my 17-40L at any equiv aperture.

I had a Samyang 14/2.8 back when I ran a 5d mk ii. It's a nice sharp lens, but the build quality, despite feeling heavy and substantial is not great. The focus mechanism had a lot of slop in it and the calibration of the distance scale was miles off. I exchanged mails with a guy in Germany who had stripped one down and he was of the view that it was a cheap mechanical design. However, optically it was better than my 17-40L at any equiv aperture.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've hard very mixed opinions regarding Samyang and their build/QC/QA. Then again, I guess you do get what you pay for. Problem is even the weakest legacy 14/2.8s cost an arm and a leg, so alternatives, even if you don't care about the optics that much, are very limited.

It isn't released just yet, but you might want to consider the forthcoming APS-C Samyang/Rokinon 10mm f/2.8. It'll give you a little wider view and will be 3/4" shorter than the 14mm f/2.8 according to the announced specs.

It isn't released just yet, but you might want to consider the forthcoming APS-C Samyang/Rokinon 10mm f/2.8. It'll give you a little wider view and will be 3/4" shorter than the 14mm f/2.8 according to the announced specs.

Click to expand...

Interesting idea. I do like the thought of a 10mm f/2.8 tilt lens. Only thing I wonder is whether the smaller APS-C imaging circle would be an issue. I don't suppose anybody's tested it on a full-frame body to verify that? Only other downside I can see is the 14/2.8 is a lot more affordable.

Links in this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.